Submitted by FDuquesne t3_10gquk6 in Futurology
esprit-de-lescalier t1_j54evwf wrote
For these large machines hydrogen makes more sense then lithium ion as these machines work 24 hours a day and there is simply no time to charge the batteries, especially given just how many batteries would be needed for these beasts.
synonymous6 t1_j54ory5 wrote
FMG here in aus bought out the Williams F1 team battery division last year. They've just delivered a 240 tonne 1.4MWhr battery for use in haul trucks. To my understanding they will be swappable so instead of waiting for charge times they just change out the packs.
thefpspower t1_j5581yv wrote
There's a truck like this working with batteries that almost doesn't need charging because it charges going full downhill and empty uphill.
You can't do that with hydrogen.
FindTheRemnant t1_j55dd6p wrote
You also can't do that anywhere that doesn't have the mine at the top of a mountain.
thefpspower t1_j55rxsq wrote
Yes but many of them are in mountains, so it works.
Commercial-Tap-7229 t1_j56k3hs wrote
Do you have more source on this article? "it consumes no energy doing it" and "eDumper produces 200 kwh of surplus energy every day" is impossible.
thefpspower t1_j56ljr7 wrote
I don't think that surplus calculation is correct but that article gets the source from the CNN article which doesn't mention that surplus.
Either way, it's way more efficient than any other type of fuel.
Surur t1_j54gofa wrote
For these massive machines, dont they often use overhead pantographs?
You would need a much smaller battery to go from line to line.
MidnightAdventurer t1_j54h65c wrote
That's one I haven't seen before... Makes sense for relatively fixed routes though, provided there is a large enough reliable electricity supply available
momolamomo t1_j54ibm2 wrote
The power-plant that power electricity through those pantographs run off coal.
Surur t1_j54po33 wrote
> Rio Tinto has officially opened a technologically advanced mine in Western Australia. The Gudai-Darri iron ore mine features a 34 MW solar farm capable of meeting one-third of the facility's energy needs.22 Jun 2022
> Together with a new lithium-ion battery energy storage system in Tom Price, the solar plant is estimated to reduce annual carbon dioxide emissions by about 90,000 t compared with conventional gas powered generation, equivalent to taking about 28,000 cars off the road.
DonQuixBalls t1_j54ihpb wrote
Most commercial hydrogen is also fossil fuel.
momolamomo t1_j54kuh9 wrote
When you burn hydrogen, which is a fossil fuel, what does it spit out?
DonQuixBalls t1_j54lapb wrote
The byproduct of steam reformed hydrogen production is C02. You get about the exact same amount by volume consumed, you just produce the carbon exhaust at a different location.
Surur t1_j54rvfg wrote
> When you burn hydrogen, which is a fossil fuel, what does it spit out?
NOx
mschuster91 t1_j55o5lz wrote
While true in itself, there still is a difference: a modern coal or other fossil fuel plant will emit basically only CO2. In contrast, cars or trucks - even with the very best the industry has to offer - simply lack the space to run more than a soot trap and a catalytic converter.
Schemen123 t1_j552twy wrote
There usually is lots of downtime where is stops for loading and unloading.
However even if that doesn't work a synthetic fuel would be far easier to handle.
Especially since having hydrogen around isn't necessary without problems in itself.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments